4.4 Review

Dietary assessment methods on n-3 fatty acid intake: a systematic review

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 102, 期 -, 页码 S56-S63

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S000711450999314X

关键词

Omega 3 fatty acids; Dietary assessment methods

资金

  1. Commission of the European Communities, specific Research, Technology and Development Programme Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources [036196]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In order to assess nutritional adequacy, valid estimates of nutrient intake are required. Specifically, the EURopean micronutrient RECommendations Aligned (EURRECA) Network of Excellence needs clear guidelines for assessing the validity of reported micronutrient intakes and n-3 fatty acid (FA) intakes. The aim of the present study was to review the validity of methods used to measure the usual n-3 FA intake of a Population. A systematic literature search was conducted for studies validating the methodology used for measuring the dietary intake of n-3 FA. The quality of the validation studies and the quality of the different dietary assessment methods were assessed using scoring systems developed by EURRECA. Fourteen papers, describing twenty studies, were identified for inclusion. According to the score system developed by EURRECA, all the studies were ranked as average, except two that were ranked as poor. The correlation coefficients between FA in subcutaneous fat and dietary intake of n-3 FA from four FFQ, one weighed record and one 24-h recall ranged between 0.40 and 0.60. Correlations between intake of n-3 FA from five FFQ, one dietary history and three weighed records and blood lipids were similar to the ones observed for subcutaneous fat. The summarised quality of the n-3 FA estimates derived from the FFQ was judged as good or acceptable according to the EURRECA scoring system. The literature describes subcutaneous fat as the best reference method, and the studies where this was used had moderate correlation coefficients and no dietary intake method was superior to any other.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据